|
|
|
|
|
Submitted by aisce on Friday, April 4, 2008 at 8:13 PM EST
  The recent 'retirement' of Ric Flair at Wrestlemania 24 certainly provoked a disgorging of sentiment from the Internet Wrestling Community. This was anticipated and capitalised upon very skilfully by the WWE, who booked the match with a keen eye for nostalgia and emotional expression. The reaction which the bout generated demonstrated clearly the love and esteem in which Flair is held, even by those members of the audience who cannot claim to have experienced at first hand his glory years in the NWA, or even much of his work in WCW: the availability of archive footage, a legendary aura, and the characteristic wrestling fan's penchant for nostalgia, did their work admirably. In the weeks leading up to the match, there was much debate as to who would be the most appropriate wrestler to retire Flair. Inevitably, one of the names which was mentioned more often than not was that of Hulk Hogan. The consensus seemed to be that, however much of a draw this might be, Hogan did not 'deserve' to be the man to end Flair's in-ring career. How curious it is that one star of the 1980s should be so venerated, whilst the other is held in such contempt by the IWC. More curious still it is, that the one who is the target for IWC opprobrium should be the more famous and, arguably, the more important figure in the history of sports entertainment. Yet this is the reaction which the mere mention of Hogan's name is likely to excite in the IWC: apparently, he does not merit whatever sum of money it would take to entice him back to the WWE, and his putative wrestling promotion was deemed to be awful before progressing beyond the conceptual stage. Indeed, criticism of Hogan has a tendency to spill over into areas in which he is only tangentially involved, such as his daughter's singing career, or his son's near-fatal irresponsibility behind the wheel. However one may feel about Hulk Hogan, it should at least be possible to identify and acknowledge his achievements, chief amongst which has been his acquisition of the status of visible mainstream presence. It is hard to think of any of his peers who have earned the right to brag of a similar accomplishment. True, The Rock has acquired some reputation in the world of film, and Jesse Ventura's political adventures have attracted a modicum of notice, but both of them have had to move away from pro-wrestling in order to make a name for themselves in the wider world. Hogan's fame is different in nature because he has become noteworthy, not for being an actor or public servant, but for being simply what he has always been: Hulk Hogan, pro-wrestler.  Partly this is due to Hogan's very distinctive image: the bodybuilder's physique (especially noticeable earlier in his career when wrestlers tended to be more solid than obviously muscular); the red and the yellow; the monk-like pate; and the walrus moustache, all combine to make him perhaps the most easily recognisable and most iconic of wrestlers. Of more substance, though, is his seminal contribution to pro-wrestling: his key role is securing the rise to pre-eminence of the WWE; his leadership of the NWO; and his involvement in so many of the best-remembered and crucial turning points in the history of sports entertainment, whether it be for good or ill, from the body slam he gave to Andre the Giant to the Fingerpoke of Doom. No other wrestler, not Ric Flair, not Shawn Michaels, not Mick Foley, can claim to have been of such importance to the sport, but whereas those three figures are overwhelmingly respected and appreciated for their contribution, Hogan is generally reviled. This raises questions as to just what it is about Hogan's wrestling persona which incites such a response. For most of Hogan's heyday, from the mid 1980s to the first years of the 90s, he wrestled as a face. Not just any face, but as the ultimate face: a paradigmatic hero and American role model. A man with a permanent hold on the belt, defeating heel challenger after heel challenger, and even his own cartoon series Hulk Hogan's Rock 'n' Wrestlingin which he did the same. His entrance was to the strains of Real American and his patriotism was continually reinforced as he overcame dastardly Arabs (The Iron Sheik), conniving communists (Nikolai Volkoff), and vile turncoats (Sgt. Slaughter). Hogan reached out to the younger members of the audience, rallying them behind exhortations to prayer and the consumption of vitamins, whilst campaigning against the evils of (amongst other things) nicotine. Today, such unalloyed goodness is less suited to the jaded modern palate. The zeitgeist is more sympathetic towards complexity and ambiguity, towards heroes who are flawed and who are shaped by trauma. The Rock 'n' Wrestling era Hogan appears today as something of an anachronism: a saccharine throwback to a more kitsch age when good and evil were clearly distinguished and distinguishable. Such black and white characterisation is most closely associated with childhood tastes and, as fans grow up, they appear shallow and lose much of their appeal. It is no coincidence that the Hogan incarnation which the IWC finds most palatable is his stint as leader of the heel NWO stable. This shift in tastes in what underpins the general contempt for Hogan's wrestling ability as displayed during his WWE tenure (it is a matter for speculation as to how perceptions of Hogan would have been altered if the US public had been exposed to the bloody, brawling style he often adopted in Japan). In actual fact, the formula for his matches was in perfect harmony with his character, and follows a familiar plotline common to all simplistic depictions of heroic endeavour: beatdown followed by recovery, the mustering of inner resources, and finally triumph, in Hogan's case via the Big Boot and the Leg Drop. Any momentary tension which is created by the hero being in peril is always tempered by the comforting assurance of his eventual victory. Again, from a contemporary adult perspective, this seems a facile and reductive way to book a match, robbing it of the edge of unpredictability which many now see as the hallmark of good wrestling.  Another aspect of the 'growing up' of Hogan's original audience is their greater access to backstage gossip. That isn't to say that dirtsheets did not exist back in the 1980s, they most certainly did, but it wasn't until the proliferation of the World Wide Web and the creation of the Internet Wrestling Community that such information became common currency amongst even casual followers of the sport. Thus it became a truism that Hogan had a monstrous and destructive ego, and that he enhanced the careers of himself and his associates at the expense of those of up-and-coming wrestlers. Are such accusations justified? Most probably, the answer is 'yes'. However they need to be seen within the context of the conditions and the industry in which Hogan was working. Sports entertainment is an ego-driven business: has there ever been a wrestler at the top of their profession who has been unassuming and devoid of hubris? On the contrary, it would seem that the 'nice' guys of the industry, the Kanes and the Stevie Richards', find it almost impossible to reap the rewards that are commensurate with their talents. Was Hogan's booking of WCW less than helpful to the company and some of its employees? Certainly, but then then so, apparently was Ric Flair's, at least according to Mick Foley who believed that Flair was in part responsible for holding him back during his stint in WCW, and famously remarked in Have a Nice Day that he was 'every bit as bad on the booking side of things as he was great on the wrestling side of it'. By preserving their spot in a cut-throat industry, a wrestler is doing no more than preserving their value, both in terms of their own drawing and earning power, and in terms of their worth to the promotion which hires them. Much has been made of Hogan's unwillingness to job and to 'put over' the next generation of wrestlers, but it is not often appreciated that such actions are subject to the law of diminishing returns. The perfect illustration of this is to be found, once more, in the recent careers of Ric Flair and Mick Foley. Both have remained active wrestlers (occasionally, in Foley's case) despite advancing years and dwindling prowess, and have worked programs with younger stars. However, both have taken losses with such frequency that a victory against them means less and less with the result that Flair's series with Carlito did little to elevate the latter, and Foley's tendency to lose even hardcore matches has taken the shine from his opponent's victories. By contrast, a match against Hogan, whether won or lost, has retained its status and its value. Being placed in such a match, against such an iconic figure a signal is sent: if the bout is between Hogan and another established star (Michaels, The Rock), then it takes on the quality of a real occasion, a 'dream' match; if it is against a wrestler who is on his way up (Lesnar, Orton) then it confirms the faith which the WWE is placing upon them. Both of those scenarios have the potential to incite the interest (and draw the money) from the fans, a quality which would be lost entirely should Hogan ever do what much of the IWC seems to want, and appear on a succession of PPVs jobbing to the likes of CM Punk, MVP, and Kennedy.  So Hogan's reputation, as far as the smart fan is concerned, would seem to be the victim of three phenomena: the developing tastes of those who once subscribed unconditionally to Hulkamania; a more world-weary cultural ethos which deems outright faces to be lacking in depth and complexity; and a perception that he is a relentlessly selfish political operator. This last is, in some senses, a product of the first two. Their tendency to indulge in backstage powerplays has never eroded the fanbase of, say Shawn Michaels or The Undertaker. If Hogan's are more conspicuous, then that is partly due to his own greater visibility and the fact that he has been supremely successful in this regard. Of far greater significance, as far as the future of WWE-style sports entertainment is concerned is the etiolated appetite for the face wrestler, especially amongst older, long-term fans. This is especially true when it comes to the they type of 'uber face', of which Hulk Hogan is the locus classicus and of which the nearest modern equivalent is John Cena. It may even be the case that much of the hostility which the IWC feels towards these types of wrestlers is becuase the 'uber face' has an appeal which is primarily targeted at the younger and the more casual audience: those who will move on, either towards different wrestlers, or away from sports entertainment fandom altogether. Although this section of the wrestling public is often held in contempt by the IWC it is essential to the survival of the sport. Yes, it tends to be less vocal, doesn't organise chanting at live events, and generally fails to read, never mind post, on wrestling messageboards. It is also much less loyal, but in the very instability lies its importance, for these are the fans who must be catered for if the WWE is to expand upon, or even sustain its viewership. A promotion which relies only on the love shown to it by smart fans can never grow beyond the size of a Ring of Honour. The parallels between Cena and Hogan have often been noted. Although they are not exact, they are still present in such aspects as Cena's lengthy run with the belt, his constant overturning of the odds, and his permanent face status. His stint as the 'marine' character also bears some minor similarities to Hogan's evocation of Americana. While it would be a mistake to characterise all Cena fans as 'women and kids' (he has his confirmed fans in the IWC, and many more who have come to respect his work ethic), it is true that the majority of his detractors seem to be amongst vocal groups teenage and older males who object to the predictable dominance of a face champion. This is also the demographic who display the keenest admiration for heels, as displayed by the constant calling for favoured wrestlers (Punk, Jericho) to be turned in order to make the greatest impact with the fans. In some senses, they are correct. Today's heel wrestler has what heel wrestlers have always had: the opportunity to cut promos and pull stunts which are cutting edge, comical, and which add character to the performer's gimmick. The problem lies in how face wrestlers are perceived. It seems that now, the only way in which a face is to be defined is by the fact that they are not a heel, and also by their association with other face wrestlers. This limits the opportunity for expression with the result that the majority of faces are seen as somewhat bland, and as labouring under certain restrictions, whereas the heel wrestler has that much more freedom to develop those aspects of their personality which appeal (cockiness, ruthlessness, anti-establishment attitudes, and the like). Yet the only logical alternative to the insipid and anodyne 'non-heel' face is the kind of wrestler exemplified for so many years by Hogan, and now by John Cena. To have every wrestler perform as heel or tweener would rob wrestling of its most fundamental dynamic: the battle between the good guy and the bad guy. Moreover, the role of the heel would become meaningless without faces to overcome, and to be defined against.  The Hogan-Cena type of face is undoubtedly painted with broad brushstrokes, and finds its greatest appeal amongst those who have yet to seek the automatic 'coolness' that comes with the adoption of counter-culture mores. In fact, one wonders if future generations of fans will become 'Cena deniers' once they hit puberty, claiming that they never sported a spinner belt and were actually into CM Punk and Edge all along. This would be yet another parallel with what happened to the Hogan fanbase: it is nearly impossible to find someone who watched the then-WWF in the 1980s and who will admit to being a Hulkamaniac. They were all fans of Savage and Piper, apparently. Unfortunately, Savage, Piper, Jake Roberts, Ted DiBiase, and all the other favourably remembered stars of that era would have been nothing without Hogan, whose presence was essential to both generate the success of the promotion in which they starred, and provide them with a superlative protagonist against which they could be measured. Great heels need great babyfaces (who will almost always defeat them), and there was none better than Hogan in his prime. He fulfilled an essential role then, and he can still do so to good effect on occasion now, even if his routine seems somewhat hackneyed and old-fashioned to some. That is how the Hulkster deserves to be remembered. If you would like to leave feedback or comments, you may send an email to the following address: aisceiyh@gmail.com All graphics are by the very wonderful KrazE Designs. Thank you for reading. ~aisce ***DIRECT LINK*** Rare & Hot Pix of MICKIE JAMES Grunge Gimmick in TNA!!!
|
|